iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Improper Military Foreclosures: U.S. Settles With Two Firms [UPDATE]

Military

First Posted: 05/26/11 09:39 PM ET Updated: 07/26/11 06:12 AM ET

Amid blistering heat and thunderous bombing in central Iraq during summer 2005, U.S. Army Sgt. James Hurley suddenly found it difficult to reach his wife back home in Michigan.

For four days straight, he called and got a troubling message that the line had been disconnected. Eventually, Hurley tracked her down through his uncle.

"She tells me, 'We got kicked out of the house, we're foreclosed,'" Hurley recalled. "I was so pissed off. If it wasn't for my roommate and my sergeant who was over me, I think I would have gone nuts."

As his wife removed every stick of furniture from their home, cramming it in her parents' house and in a nearby garage, Hurley was left to stew halfway around the world. He asked for extra-long shifts and additional mechanic assignments, just to keep his mind off things.

It would be another six months before he could return home to sort out the mess, beginning a years-long court battle with Saxon Mortgage Services over the loss of his home while deployed overseas.

Prompted in part by Hurley's case, the Justice Department on Thursday announced a $22 million settlement with Saxon and a unit of Bank of America to provide relief to more than 170 active-duty military members who experienced improper foreclosures over the past few years.

Active-duty military are protected by the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, a law that provides a slew of consumer protection measures designed to protect military personnel from financial distress. Among other things, the law prohibits foreclosure on a servicemember's home unless there is a court order.

The Government Accountability Office hinted at the investigation in a report earlier this month.

The Justice Department alleged that the Bank of America unit, formerly part of Countrywide Financial, improperly foreclosed on 160 military personnel between January 2006 and May 2009 and didn't check whether the borrowers were active-duty military.

They also alleged that Saxon Mortgage Services Inc., a subsidiary of Morgan Stanley, foreclosed on 17 servicemembers without obtaining court orders.

Bank of America agreed to pay $20 million, and Saxon Mortgage Services, of Fort Worth, Texas, agreed to pay $2.35 million. If additional military members come forward, the companies have agreed to compensate them beyond those amounts.

"I feel quite confident in the thoroughness of the investigation to date," said Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez. "However, if we identify other victims in the course of our review, or if the servicers identify other victims, we will of course compensate them."

On average, Perez said victims in the Saxon case will receive an average of $130,555, while the Countrywide victims will receive about $125,000 each.

JPMorgan Chase has also disclosed in recent months that it improperly foreclosed on 18 servicemembers. Perez said he could not comment on other mortgage servicers that the Justice Department may be investigating for violations of military consumer laws.

He said he hopes that all other servicers "will take a very careful look at these settlement agreements."

A spokesman for Morgan Stanley issued a statement on behalf of Saxon Mortgage Services.

"First and foremost, we want to apologize to those military families that were affected by any mistakes made in the foreclosure process. Our servicemen and women deserve the highest level of customer service. Saxon has taken meaningful steps to ensure it has appropriate policies and procedures in place to comply fully with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act."

Victims identified by the Justice Department included soldiers who returned home severely paralyzed and suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome.

Hurley settled with Saxon Mortgage Services separately in March, but the Justice Department initiated the investigation in response to his case, Perez said.

For six months after he heard the news in 2005, Hurley was burdened with both the mental strain of a war zone and concerns about the fate of his wife and home on the other side of the world.

Since returning home to Michigan in early 2006, he and his wife have moved into a small cabin where her parents lived.

He did receive some money earlier this year -- he couldn't disclose the amount based on the terms of his settlement -- but he said his only real wish was to get his house back.

A longtime handyman, Hurley has done his best to expand the place and make it more comfortable. But after the foreclosure, his prior home of more than a decade remains in the hands of someone else.

"To this day I still don't understand why," Hurley reflected. "They took it illegally; why can't I get it back? I didn't want any money. All I wanted was my house back."

He suffers from pinched nerves and major back and neck problems, the result of injuries sustained while driving around in tanks. He has major difficulties hearing out of his right ear.

Hurley said he was happy to hear that others are getting restitution, and he hopes that more come forward.

"These banks know they can't do it, but they turn around and they do it anyway," he said. "Because they're the people who are in power, and they think all the government's going to do is slap their hands."

This report has been updated to include comment from Morgan Stanley.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
Amid blistering heat and thunderous bombing in central Iraq during summer 2005, U.S. Army Sgt. James Hurley suddenly found it difficult to reach his wife back home in Michigan. For four days straig...
Amid blistering heat and thunderous bombing in central Iraq during summer 2005, U.S. Army Sgt. James Hurley suddenly found it difficult to reach his wife back home in Michigan. For four days straig...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 301
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
peeaceandquiet
08:23 AM on 06/01/2011
It is very important for every service person to sign a SSCRA. Its a civil relief act that all military are entitled to. It protects them if deployed against any creditors putting late fees, overlimit fees and even taken your home if you are late with a payment as long as you have been deployed. My gripe is that the military doesn't seem to give this information to the servicement upon enlisting. Please tell everyone you know that is in the service to contact all their creditors before being deployed and get this paperwork done to protect themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canoeal
Wooden Boatbuilder, Hab 3:17-18
10:52 AM on 05/31/2011
The banks should be required to buy them a new upgraded house, in the area they want to live. At the Banks expense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
You can't take the sky from me.
10:06 AM on 05/31/2011
There is no suitable punishment for improper foreclosures that is anything less than total seizure of the assets of the bank and distribution of those assets among its victims.
06:06 AM on 05/31/2011
One of the shames is how many people even read this article. If it was Pawlently running for president there would be 9,000 comments from peeps that were concerned. Only 297 comments to this post as of yet, shows truly the overall care and concern of our military members. Just remember folks if 1% of Americans were not part of the volunteer force; someone close to you or even you would have been drafted. 100% commitment to the care and support of our troops is needed from each and everyone of us. 130,000 per person is ridiculous, what an insult considering what each and everyone went thru. All Banks should have to audit their records now, based on this finding, and repair above and beyond each and every service member any injustice has happened to, or else face imprisonment when someone else catches their mistakes to our military, preceded by excessive fines and judgments.
06:51 PM on 05/30/2011
The sergeant in the article asked the appropriate question. If they took his home illegally, why can't they give it back to him or better yet, why are they not compelled legally to restore him at least back to his former position- legally and financially? This stinks to high heavens. And before someone comments on my lack of full knowledge of the situation or the proper understanding of the pressures on the serviceman in a combat zone, I both did 2 tours in Vietnam and I have foreclosed on many properties (residential and otherwise) while running loan workout departments for banks large and small. There is no excuse for what happened to these service members and $22 million does not begin to compensate for the pain and anguish here. What about the servicemember who did not have a Sergeant or Squad Leader senior to him who would look out for his troops as he did for him. How many servicemembers have been wounded or killed because of the distraction caused because of the pain they knew was being brought to bear on their families and they were powerless to do anyhting to help them. It is time for people to be held accountable for the pain they caused in both financial and physical terms and then the process will take a decided turn for the better. Those people are both the line person handling the borrowers and the owners of the corporations involved.
04:31 AM on 05/31/2011
I agree with you. I'm an RN and much of the VA med care I've seen has been appalling. Someone here should have seen jail time for this, and this was not enough compensation-especially for someone who is paralyzed.
On another note, to everyone complaining how terrible this is- it is nothing really new in overall treatment for alot of vets. Starting with my Dad, in my family, we do not tithe 10% before taxes to any church or organization. We help fix up homes (ramps, wheelchair access, etc), or buy a wheelchair, or groceries, or help pay some bills, we have bought good second hand vehicles. My Dad had 2 apartments he kept where military families could stay for hard times until they could get on their feet-he did that for 10 yrs. (And no, we are not in any way rich- but we do what we can as a large, extended family to help- we pool money, resources, and labor whenever we can. Some of us are struggling ourselves, but it's how we were raised). My point is, you can always do something, however small, that will help. And we should be helping our own.
06:21 PM on 05/30/2011
If these guys are getting pulled from the reserves, they are forced to leave their old civilian jobs , and therefore their old income. Of course they fall behind on their mortgages. There should be a simple procedure in place so that active duty personnel are allowed a reduced mortgage payment until they are back in their civilian jobs. There is no good reason in this country to put the family of a US soldier out on the street. Just WHO are the banks hiring to handle this paperwork? The biggest idiots who are the bottom of the barrel??? Just a disgrace.
04:41 PM on 05/30/2011
Half of the story is left out. How did the bank "overlook" the paper work, and why was the couple behind on their payments? As usual, the Liberal media portrays the big bad corporation as the devil and the poor misfortunate little guy as the angel.

My guess is there's a lot more to the story than we are hearing about, and it's too bad such shoddy journalism is allowed to be published.
08:56 PM on 05/30/2011
fuss 1

How's that liberal media diatribe working for ya? Do most of the people you know still believe that corporations are the 'good guy'?
,
If you're in search of shoddy journalism, turn on your TV

aloha, wade
03:46 AM on 05/31/2011
Fuss1- Hurley owned his home for more than a decade. This article states these foreclosures were done improperly. Many people in this rediculous race to foreclose on property by banks have been rapidly foreclosed on for one missed payment; how do you know perhaps the partner at home didn't understand a notice in the mail (if they even received one?). Perhaps their partner at home was ill or out of town and didn't get to the mail and bills for a month (that has happened to me). My point is this article does not say anyone was behind - it says they were improperly foreclosed upon. I have heard of so many horror stories from people who were foreclosed on after one missed payment because no matter how they tried to fix it or contact the holder of the mortgage, no response was made. People have written reams of how they repeatedly sent the required documentation and were ignored. Checks have been lost in the mail. If he was now receiving less money than his civilian job, maybe there was a problem making payment for 2 months. Here in my state they can and do foreclose if you miss a payment and in 90 days (sometimes less, depending on circumstance) they foreclose. And $130,000.00 is nothing when you consider his decade of payments and the home improvements he had made. Someone here should have received jail time for this "lapse".
04:00 PM on 05/30/2011
I don't understand how the sale of these properties is legal? If it's not, then why isn't the 'sale' reversed?
It seems that Realtors need to be educated on why these sales are no good (and I say this as a former Realtor). I believe if they knew, you wouldn't get a decent one to touch these properties.

Before anyone starts with the Realtor jokes, skip it. There are far more decent ones than not out there......
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissingAmerica
03:15 PM on 05/30/2011
People are being squeezed, the government fines the squeezers, the squeezed are still in trouble. What saddens me is the condition of the country these soldiers are fighting for, not to mention tha many young people are entering the military now because it is the only paycheck they can get! They are kind of "damned if they do and damned if they don't." So not the country I grew up in. What in the Hell happened to us?
01:55 PM on 05/30/2011
I'd like to know the rest of the story. Why are these active duty military people grossly behind in their mortgage payments? That degree of personal financial mismanagement was certainly known before these people were sent overseas in the first place and would frequently lead to administrative dismissal from service. I certainly agree in punishment of the responsible mortgage people, but there were obviously earlier problems that should have been addressed.
03:58 AM on 05/31/2011
Why do you assume people were grossly behind on their payments? Hurley owned his home for over a decade- he had made many home improvements on it. Many states allow foreclosure if you miss one or 2 payments, they can foreclose in 90 days or less. You must be asleep if you have missed reading some of the gross misconduct by banks in their race to foreclose on as many properties as quickly as possible. Perhaps his partner at home was ill and unable to attend to a mailing or didn't understand it? Perhaps there wasn't any notice made at all. I have a neighbor who didn't know his house was up for auction until a neighbor notified him he saw it in the paper- and he was not behind on anything, the bank made an error. It cost him thousands to get his stay of auction and save his home. There is no defense for the banks in this case at all- they broke the law, foreclosed improperly, and now these servicemen/women get peanuts for a settlement- and no one is going to jail as they should have. I wonder how much money Hurley put into his home in a decade? I hope he got more than a measely 130K.
12:57 PM on 05/30/2011
This is yet another example of government ignoring the excesses of big business. I am a fiscal conservative, and believe less government is better, but in some cases we must depend on the government to defend us against companies that will not be reined in by any other method. When I first read, many months ago, about these illegal foreclosures, as a former Marine I was incredibly angry and, also, frustrated at the carte blanche some of these lenders had to screw our servicemen. Now, a $22 mil fine? That's not even serious pocket change for these companies. This isn't a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue of doing what's right for American servicemen and women and, as has been done for years with lousy health care for injured veterans, our wonderful elected officials again turn their backs on our troops when they need support. $22 mil? I'm not shocked in any way by the petty response by regulators and the miniscule settlement. But I am excited about the possibility that we can rise up and vote every single incumbent out of office the next time they are up for reelection. I honestly think we'd do better.
tjdwill01
more than distance divides Austin and Boston
01:50 PM on 05/30/2011
Civic and political movements must call for a decent separation of corporation and state. Politicians, by "regulating" industry (a better choice of a words is the world "control" but "regulation" is what they call it so as not to make it obvious) start the campaign cash flowing from those in the industry. The cash flows to get government favors (restrictions on competition, monopoly privileges, government contracts, etc.) or to avoid being on the wrong end of legislation (laws that give your competitors advantages over you). The politicians are the greedy ones - liberals seem to think it's the corporations, but it's a game the politicians created, not something business created. ONE MUST DRAW THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMPETITIVE FREE ENTERPRISE AND CARTEL CAPITALISM, DOMINATED BY INDUSTRIAL MONOPOLISTS AND INTERNATIONAL BANKERS. THE DIFFERENCE IS THE PRIVATE ENTERPRISE OPERATES BY OFFERING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES IN A COMPETITIVE FREE MARKET, WHILE THE CARTEL CAPITALIST USES THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE THE PUBLIC TO DO BUSINESS WITH THEM.
12:55 PM on 05/30/2011
What a bargain the banks got away with huh? Let's see if I got it right, the banks can take away your 300k home and 3 years later be forced to repay you - but only 130k.
How is that seen as a victory for the servicemen, for the civilian population, or for anyone OTHER then the banks?
12:37 PM on 05/30/2011
God bless the troops who sacrafice so much... yet ask so little
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:48 AM on 05/30/2011
why is bank of america paying this lawsuit? when in the SEC lawsuit they say they should not be responsible because it was not a "de facto" merger with countrywide? do they get to pick and choose different merger types depending on the lawsuit?
08:57 AM on 05/30/2011
I don't understand the why "we the people " let this get this far. If we American voters would get together and find the representatives that are in the pocket of these huge banking corporations we could really effect a change. Until we can all agree to go after these greedy sons of female canines, we will not be treated fairly. In this day of instant networking the people should be stronger, look to Libia and what good the common people did there. On the topic of punishment for breaking the law, if it was any of us regular citizens we would still be incarcerated. With no real punishment, the U S Government is condoning legal larceny.
12:59 PM on 05/30/2011
Because "we the people" don't want to pay attention and get involved to fix things. That. after all, would take time and effort and most Americans want to expend neither.
01:05 PM on 05/30/2011
To a certain extent you are right, but I think people are waking up and getting more involved... at least that's my hope...